Quote 1: “Formatic style diminishes the creativity of both the author and the receiver of art because it introduces the apparent accessibility of trade marked homogeneity into the art”

Comment 1: I agree with the notion that accessibility to trade diminishes the importance of an item as we cherish originality. However, in today’s society anything can be duplicated and people like to share in trends. Everything can be replicated, cheepened, or formulated.

Question: Would art only be creative if an artist doesn’t have a specific style? And, furthermore, isn’t that style in of itself unique enough this is its own form of art? And if every artist has a unique style, then would a cheap knockoff actually diminish the value of thequailit piece? 

Quote 2: “Everything one does in art has social significance”

Comment 2: I disagree with this statement. Art has a loose definition and not all art is socially significant. Question: If a child were to draw a picture of a flower, for example, would that be socially significant. If yes, how so? And if no, then would you consider that children’s drawing art?